EU: Regionalism vs Nationalism

The concept of regionalism is as diverse as its object of study and there is no commonly accepted definition of what a region is. In post world war era, regionalism as a concept has been posited against the notion of nationalism. The elements of gradual decentralization and devolution that are contained within every nation state and the development of which may affect the nation both directly through political action and indirectly through political or social philosophy, is “regionalism.” Regionalism, in simplest terms, refers to processes and structures of region-building in terms of closer economic, political, security and socio-cultural linkages between states and societies that geographically proximate. In political science, regionalism is often used synonymous with regional cooperation and regional integration, which could be seen as the opposite ends of a continuum along which regionalism may vary. The article looks at the ongoing debate on nationalism versus regionalism in India and Europe.

Regionalism has remained perhaps the most potent force in Indian politics ever since independence. It has remained the main basis of many regional political parties which have been governing many states since the late 1960s. Regionalism is rooted in India’s manifold diversity of languages, cultures, tribes, communities, religions and so on, and encouraged by the regional concentration of those identity markers, and fuelled by a sense of regional deprivation. Regionalism is the stark reality if Indian politics. This feeling is sustained on the basis of language or on the basis of religious cultural or distinct ethnic/tribal groups. Many regional movements have been launched to emphasize distinct and separate regional identity of people in states such as Uttarakhand, and some North-East Indian states. The impact of regional political parties on Indian polity is a debatable issue, but it cannot be denied that regional parties have broken the stranglehold of the two major Indian national parties and, in so doing, have helped usher in a semblance of competitive federalism. With respect to the state, these parties can perform the good governance. They can take up the problems of the state to the vision of the centre and get a resolution for the same. But that requires the dedication towards the state and the citizens who have trusted these parties to take them to power. Probably the greatest service rendered by the regional political parties is that they have focused the attention of the people in remote areas on various political and economic issues and contributed to their political awakening. Above all, the regional parties have been able to impress on the national political parties that they cannot put up with their attitude of indifference towards regional problems and have compelled them to take keen interest in the resolution of their problems. The creation of the state of Telangana in 2014 points out the regionalism and regional parties can highlight issues pertaining to the welfare of the respective regions.

While positive regionalism is a welcome thing in so far maintain as it encourages the people to develop a sense of belongingness and solidarity on the basis of a common language, religion or historical background, if taken beyond a limit, increasing regionalism could also lead to the emergence of process of disintegration and secessionism and a direct threat to Indian nationalism. In principle, regionalism need not be regarded as an un­healthy or anti-national phenomenon—unless it takes a militant, aggressive turn and encourages the growth of secessionist tendencies (as it did in Punjab where strong regionalism ultimately resulted in the growth of Khalistani terrorism a few decades ago). National unity is not impaired if the people of a region have a genuine pride in their language and culture. However, regionalism must not be allowed to become a shield for militancy, extremism, establishing a reign of terror and carrying on other anti-national activities. Regionalism develops into a serious threat to national unity if politicians do not go beyond their regional loyalty and claim to stand only for their regional interests such as the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) which opposes the employment and residence of Non Maharashtra people in the state of Maharashtra. The parochial regionalist stance of the MNS is a prime example of negative nationalism regionalism and against the socialist, secular, and democratic principles of Indian republic.

As regards Europe, regionalism versus nationalism debate takes the form of supra-nationalism versus nationalism. The European Union has been one of the most successful examples of regional integration whereby a supranational institutional has competences in matters pertaining to governance. However, there is a growing rise of Eurosceptism among some political and social groups and their rise of such populist anti-European parties was visible in their performance in the European Parliament elections of 2014. The worries over the descending competitiveness of the EU and low recognition on the prevailing institutions led to a sharp rise in support for the parties who oppose the EU. The far-right National Front finished first in France. The Euro-skeptical U.K. Independence Party did the same in Britain. Ultra-left Syriza and neo-fascist Golden Dawn combined for 36 percent of the vote in Greece. The rise of anti-Europe politicians in the continent’s second- and third-largest countries, promoting simplistic messages tinged by xenophobia and anti immigrant feeling are genuinely worrisome.

The last EP elections showed that protectionist tendencies due to both the long-standing financial crisis in the EU and social fears triggered by pressures of immigration, especially after the Arab Spring, added significant momentum to the nationalist wave. Besides, this situation does not only trigger a major increase in the far right at the domestic level; it also triggers a substantial debate on the future of EU integration. However, beyond the major increase in the far-right, caused by conjectural events, the real problem is that the far-right discourse is shifting to central politics and this discourse is transforming into a structural phenomenon that expands throughout Europe. In other words, it is the populist political rhetoric that has been a part of general politics in most European countries and with this comes far-right rhetoric or nationalist elements. Ironically, to counter the anti-EU sentiments, the remedy is to step up national reforms as countries that are hurt economically tend to lurch toward nationalism. It is up to the national governments to implement structural reforms such as job creation, reforms of the labour market, reforms in the tax structure and ensuring democratic accountability to the common citizen. In a positive development, the current Italian Presidency of the European Union has highlighted Youth unemployment, immigration, investment in small- and medium-sized enterprises and tax reform and allowing more money to be spent on public investment are key issues.

Those supportive of the EU need to develop their own effective template for instilling a greater sense of democratic legitimacy and the focus must turn to the deeper drivers of the EU’s democratic dilemma.